An interactive essay

The graveyard of good, bad and so-so ideas

A century-and-change of New York City mayoral platforms from candidates who lost the race — and the surprising number of their proposals that eventually clawed their way back to life.

1886 to 2025 57 proposals from 37 losing campaigns Median lag from loss to law: about 15 years

In New York, ideas don't die — they just change carriers.

An interactive catalog of policy proposals from losing New York City mayoral candidates between 1886 and 2025: what got buried, what came back, and what's still waiting.

57Proposals tracked
18Eventually adopted, in whole or part
33Still alive in current debate
6Decisively buried
Search
Era
Fate

A century of arguments, plotted

Each dot is one losing-candidate proposal, placed at the year it was first floated. Color marks fate. Hover to see the proposal.

Data appendix

Every proposal in the dataset, with category, fate, threads, and source attribution. Filters from the controls bar apply to this table. Click any column header to sort.

Year Candidate Proposal Chapter Fate Threads Coverage Source

How to read this

Source attributes each entry to the most direct provenance available — the candidate's published platform where it survives, the relevant biography or memoir, contemporaneous press coverage, or Wikipedia entries that themselves cite primary materials. Where only secondary press coverage exists for a contemporary entry (2009-2025 candidates), that is noted.

Categorization follows the report's four-chapter taxonomy: won (the idea became law in some form), ahead (still in serious circulation, not yet enacted), bad (the prescription was wrong, not just the politics), strange (in a category of its own).

Fate is the more granular cut: adopted means meaningfully implemented in some form; alive means in active policy debate or partial implementation; buried means decisively rejected with no current movement.

What this is not. This is not a complete record. Several losing campaigns — Dinkins 1993, Ferrer 2001 and 2005, Thompson 2013 — produced platforms that haven't been mined here. Reader corrections welcome.

Surprise pairings

Ideologically improbable echoes — same idea, different decade, different team jersey.

What this tells us

Four patterns from the graveyard

Losing candidates have often been better thinkers than the winners.

Hillquit, Thomas, Buckley, Mailer-Breslin, Abzug, Green: people with serious, articulated worldviews who lost to candidates whose appeal was machine-based, charismatic, fiscal-emergency-oriented, or self-funded. Voters don't pick mayors based on idea density. The ideas keep coming back anyway.

Most "weird" ideas turn out to be early.

Bike lanes were weird in 1965. Decriminalization was weird in 1965. Public housing was weird in 1917. Civil rights ordinances were weird in 1977. The category of "obviously crazy mayoral idea" should be regarded with some humility.

Some "weird" ideas are actually weird.

Sweet Sunday was operationally impossible. Mandatory civil commitment for addicts is morally indefensible. Banning private cars from Manhattan in 1969 with no replacement infrastructure was a thought experiment, not a plan. The category of "actually unworkable" is also real.

The line between the two is implementation, not ideology.

Hearst was right about utility capture and mostly wrong about whether municipal ownership would have improved things. Buckley was right about narcotics policy and wrong about what to do with addicts. The diagnosis tends to be more durable than the prescription, and voters should be more skeptical of the second than the first.

A separate list

Quixotic candidates

No-chance contenders who left a documentable trace anyway. Not in the main dataset because each finished with under two percent — but each ran on one specific big idea worth remembering.

1985~0.4%

Lenora Fulani

New Alliance Party

Black-led independent socialist running a two-tier critique that both major parties were rigged against working-class communities of color. The first of several New York City runs.

1993~1.4%

George Marlin

Conservative Party

Bond-trader and Buckley acolyte running a doctrinaire libertarian-conservative platform: abolish rent regulation, shrink City Hall, privatize what could be privatized.

2005, 2009<1%

Jimmy McMillan

The Rent Is Too Damn High Party

A one-man party built around a single sentence and a pair of black gloves. The platform was the party name. He repeated it with greater intensity each cycle.

2017~0.3%

Akeem Browder

Green

Brother of Kalief Browder, who took his life in 2015 after three years on Rikers awaiting trial. Browder's flagship plank was closing Rikers immediately, paired with a broader criminal-justice and homelessness platform.

2017~1.0%

Bo Dietl

Independent

Celebrity ex-NYPD detective whose 2017 platform fused aggressive pro-police rhetoric, opposition to bike lanes, and an unusually hands-on focus on street homelessness. Ran on the Dump de Blasio line.

2017~0.4%

Robert Gangi

Democratic primary

Longtime director of the Police Reform Organizing Project who challenged de Blasio in the 2017 Democratic primary on a single-issue platform of ending Broken Windows policing.

2021<1%

Paperboy Love Prince

Democratic primary

Brooklyn rapper and performance artist whose platform was $2,000-a-month universal basic income, rainbow costumes, and free-food giveaways. Took it as seriously as anyone in the field.

2021<0.5%

Quanda Francis

Empowerment Party

Self-described data-driven Smart City candidate, running an accounting-style budget analysis well ahead of the field — every line item, every contract.

Methodology, scope and sources

Scope

"Failed" here means lost a general election or a major-party primary, between 1886 and 2025. Henry George ran in 1886 — pre-consolidation — but he is the godfather of the genre and is included. Ideas first proposed by losing candidates that were later adopted by winning candidates appear under the original loser-proposer; eventual victors are mentioned only as carriers of someone else's prior idea.

Categorization

Four chapters: eventually won (the idea became law in some form), ahead of their time (still in serious circulation, not yet enacted), probably bad (the implementation was wrong, not just the politics), and truly strange (in a category of their own). The "fate" filter — adopted, alive, buried — is a more granular version of the same axis.

Sources

Drawn from the Gotham Center for New York City History, City Journal, Manhattan Institute, Jacobin, the Forward, the New-York Historical Society, the LaGuardia and Wagner Archives, Skynomics Blog, and contemporaneous press. Specific candidate platforms were cross-checked against multiple accounts where available.

Recommended further reading

  • William F. Buckley Jr., The Unmaking of a Mayor (1966)
  • Joe Flaherty, Managing Mailer (1970)
  • Bella Abzug, Bella! Ms. Abzug Goes to Washington (1972)
  • Evan Mandery, The Campaign (1999)
  • Henry George, Progress and Poverty (1879)

A note on what's missing

This is not a complete record. David Dinkins's 1993 reelection bid, Mark Green's 1997 and 1998 races for higher office, the full 2017 primary field beyond Sal Albanese, and Whitney Tilson's deeper education-policy planks all sit just outside what's catalogued here. Reader suggestions welcome.